INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CIÊNCIAS E EDUCAÇÃO A DISTÂNCIA

Faculdade de ciências de educação

Curso de licenciatura em ensino de Geografia

Green Revolution

Nome do Estudante: Jaulito Manuel Seula, código: 91230290

Pemba, Maio de 2023

0
INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CIÊNCIAS E EDUCAÇÃO A DISTÂNCIA

Faculdade de ciências de educação

Curso de licenciatura em ensino de Geografia

Green Revolution

Trabalho do campo a ser submetido

na coordenação do curso de
licenciatura em ensino de Geografia
da UNISCED na disciplina de Inglês

Tutor:

Nome do Estudante: Jaulito Manuel Seula, código: 91230290

Pemba, Maio de 2023

1
Índice
1. Introduction................................................................................................................2

1.1. Aims.......................................................................................................................3

a) General aim................................................................................................................3

b) Specific aims..............................................................................................................3

1.2. Method....................................................................................................................3

2. The Green Revolution................................................................................................3

2.1. Background.............................................................................................................3

2.2. The Green Revolution............................................................................................4

2.3. The possibilities for a Green Revolution in Africa................................................5

2.3.1. Technology.........................................................................................................6

2.3.2. Land use rights....................................................................................................6

2.3.3. The role of the state............................................................................................7

2.3.4. The critique against the Green Revolution.........................................................7

2.3.5. Soil Erosion.........................................................................................................8

2.4. The agricultural policy today..................................................................................9

3. Conclusion................................................................................................................11

4. References................................................................................................................12

2
 1. Introduction
The Green Revolution resulted in increased production of food grains
(especially wheat and rice) and was in large part due to the introduction into developing
countries of new, high-yielding varieties, beginning in the mid-20th century with
Borlaug’s work.

1.1. Aims

a) General aim
To related about the green revolution;

b) Specific aims
To describe the green revolution

Explain about the green revolution

1.2. Method
The material used has mainly consisted of books from libraries, and reports found on
the internet.

3
 2. The Green Revolution

2.1. Background
The result of this initiative was striking; in 1956, Mexico became self-sufficient in
wheat and in 1967 it had doubled its wheat production and could therefore start to
export both maize and wheat, which contributed to a blossoming economy. This success
is often described as the take off for the Green Revolution and it further encouraged the
Rockfeller Foundation to merge with Ford Foundation in order to create the
International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines in 1962 (Brown 1971:11).

This foundation started to develop a high yield rice variety, IR-8, that is today known as
the ‘miracle rice’ since it, like the Mexican wheat, doubled the yields, that is to say, if
the right conditions such as: irrigation, fertilizers and pesticides were provided (Brown
1971:12). To give one example: in Indonesia the yields of rice increased from 1.76
tonnes per acre to 4.52 per acre (Djurfeldt 2006a).

The new varieties were, among other countries, introduced in Pakistan, India, The
Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Laos. However, the seeds were
introduced in non-Asian countries as well, such as, for example: Kenya, the Ivory
Coast, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria and Brazil (Brown 1971:13). Nevertheless, it was in
the Asian countries that the results of the new seeds were the most remarkable. The food
crises were successfully stemmed and the countries reached self-sufficiency and even
got a surplus of their production, which made it possible for them to start exporting.

2.2. The Green Revolution

According to Djurfeldt Even if the discussion on the Green Revolution has been focused
on high-yield varieties (HYVs) and technology, the main literature gives a broader
perspective. As Jirström (1996) claims, the definition of the Green Revolution is
controversial and concludes that the notion seems to “depend on the senses in which the
term is understood”, (Jirström1996:16). Leaf, another researcher of the Green
Revolution, summarizes the divergent views:

The Green Revolution can be construed in a narrow or a broad sense. In

the narrow sense it consists primarily in the adoption of the new high-
yielding varieties of wheat and rice and associated technologies. In the
broad sense it includes not only this but all other economic changes as

4
 well as the social and cultural changes that either contributed to the
technological and ecological changes or were derived from them (Leaf
1984:23 in Jilström 1996:16).

Djurfeldt is one of the scholars who defines the Green Revolution in a broader sense. He
does not only identify the Green Revolution in technical terms, instead he widens the
notion to include the world order, national leaders, economy and small farmers. We
found this concept interesting and important in the debate of the Green Revolution and
have therefore chosen to use in our study of a Green Revolution in the northern part of
Mozambique. Djurfeldt studies focus on the Green Revolution in Asia and its
possibilities to be implemented in Africa. According to Djurfeldt, the situation in Asia
until the 1960s was very much the same as the current situation in sub-Saharan Africa.
Asia was struggling with high population growth, widespread poverty, hunger and
undernourishment (Djurfeldt 2005:1).

Moreover, Asian states5 were as African states are today, often described as ‘soft states’
6, referring to the lack of ‘social discipline’ and corruption within the society. Despite
this, the Asian states started to realize that they had to undertake means in order to
develop their countries. The reasons were domestic factors, like food riots and social
unrest, which caused fear of loosing their governmental power. External, geopolitical
factors such as regional conflicts together with the dynamism of the Cold War were of
vital importance as well. The US feared that communist revolutions would rise in Asia
as a result of food insecurity and poverty. For this reason they chose to support the
development of the agricultural technology in Asia. Their solution was to support the
domestic food production through agricultural intensification7 (Djurfeldt et al.
2006a:93). By introducing large-scale programs of subsidies, investments in
infrastructure like roads, irrigation systems, and schools, science and consulting, the
intensification in Asia became a strategy based on governmental interventions, private
sector and smallscale family farms (Jirström 2005:26).

2.3. The possibilities for a Green Revolution in Africa

Even if there have been attempts of a Green Revolution in SSA they have not been
successfully implemented. Djurfeldt et al. have therefore examined the difficulties and
possibilities for a Green Revolution in this region. Below we will present their
conclusions. 3.3.1 Intensification When discussing agricultural development, Djurfeldt
refers to Ester Boserups theory on how a growing population pressure can stimulate

5
agricultural intensification. However, he also admits “the issue of expansion vs.
intensification is rather complex to explain since the driving forces are not only a
growing population but also market forces in different combinations in time and space“
(Djurfedt 2006b: 37). The agricultural growth in Africa has although, with some few
exceptions, in general been characterized by extensive cultivation such as burn beating
and fallow-fields. This can be explained by the sparse population and the excess of land.
However, this cultivation system was only sustainable as long as the continent was
under-populated and the land frontier open and such was the case until the mid 1970s.
At this point, the population started to grow which lead to a need for intensification
(Djurfeldt 2006a:95). Yet, intensification is difficult to carry out in most countries in
Africa, due to the fact that the infrastructure is underdeveloped.

2.3.1. Technology
The new technology, i.e. improved seeds, chemical fertilizers, irrigation and transport
systems, were all essential for the Green Revolutions in Asia. Djurfeldt claims that the
seeds have to be refined locally and mentions the ‘maize revolution’ in Zimbabwe as an
example. Even before independence the country invested in research and extension, this
later resulted in a type of hybrid maize specially made for African conditions. This type
was later spread to the small farmers and the country became within some years, self-
sufficient in maize (Djurfeldt 2001:220). Maize, Djurfeldt continues, will probably be
the crop of huge importance for possibility of the continent to reach self-sufficiency.
Rice has become another important food crop in Africa that today is of major
importance. Djurfeldt believes that large profit can be made if the continent becomes
selfsufficient in rice (Djurfeldt 2001:221).

2.3.2. Land use rights

In African societies in general, Djurfeldt claims, the lots of land that the small farmer
uses normally belongs to the tribe. In other words, the small farmer has a right to use his
land as a ‘member of his people’. But the system is not democratic; on the contrary it is
built up on despotism and oppression, which implies that the small farmers have to
share ‘the fruit of the labor’ with others in the group. In general, young people work for
elder, women work for their men and so on. Djurfeldt argues that the effect of this
system is that the small farmers become less motivated to make the efforts needed to

6
intensify their production. The small farmers know that the result of their effort will go
to someone else. Furthermore, they do not always feel secure that they can keep their
land with conflicts about land being a common feature in African societies. This
insecurity is another reason why they do not want to intensify their production.
Considering all these aspects, Djurfeldt highlights the importance of allotting land use
rights to the farmer that cultivates the land since it is a pre-condition for intensification.
Today this is not always the case especially not among the weakest groups or women
(Djurfeldt 2001:208 f).

2.3.3. The role of the state

When describing the Green Revolution, Djurfeldt highlights the importance of the state
and he tries to give some explanations to why the attempts in Africa turned out to be
unsuccessful. One of the most important reasons, according to him, is that the African
states have not been put under pressure from the population to undertake means for
development. As has been mentioned, their countries were self-sufficient until the mid-
1970s. In other words, there was no approaching food crisis that would jeopardize the
power of the government, as was the case in Asia. Moreover, there were no external
threats of war since the axiom, after the independence, both in Africa and among the
donors, was that the colonial frontiers should be respected.

2.3.4. The critique against the Green Revolution

Vandana Shiva In 2006, The Gates Foundation announced that it is contributing with
US$100 million to launch a new initiative together with the Rockefeller Foundation,
viz. to spark a Green Revolution in Africa. The initiators of this project were hoping to
avoid some of the mistakes the first and original Green Revolution was criticized for
(Paulson 2006). However, the critics of the Green Revolution argued that the Gates
Foundation ignores the failure of the first Green Revolution, which was sponsored by
the Rockefeller, and Ford foundations (Rosset 2006). The Green Revolution as a
solution to overcome food insecurity and global hunger has been highly questioned by
economic analysts, NGOs and farmers in many parts of the world. According to many
critics, the Green Revolution is emphasizing on capital-intensive, off-farm chemical
inputs and that it can either reinforce yield leveling or decline, it is considered to be an
unsuitable package to reduce poverty (Altieri et al. 2000:2). Further criticism has

7
concerned the reduction and the availability of nutritious food crops for the local
population, this due to the fact that the poor countries have started to grow cash crops
for the rich countries instead of food crops for the people in their own countries (Iowa
State University).

Vandana Shiva, an Indian ecologist is one of the critics. She claims that the “Green
revolution is a failure”, giving Punjab in India as an example (Shiva1991:1). The main
critique and Shiva’s most important findings and experiences of the effects of the Green
Revolution, are summarized below.

The ecological aspects: ƒ High-yielding varieties are a myth. Shiva starts by pointing
out that there is a misunderstanding concerning ‘high-yielding varieties’. The seeds are
not high yielding themselves; it is rather a question about seeds that are “highly
responsive to certain key inputs such as fertilizers and irrigation water” (Shiva 1991:1).
If these inputs are absent, the new seeds behave poorer than indigenous varieties. Also,
from a nutritionist point of view, the HYV mainly consists of water since the artificial
fertilizers that are being used cause metabolic problems to the plant that reacts by taking
up extra water (Shiva 1991:3). ƒ

The Green Revolution has reduced the genetic diversity and increased the use of
pesticides. The critics of the Green Revolution argue that as a consequence of this, the
genetic diversity has been reduced due to the wide spread and introduction of varieties
that are not locally adapted (Altieri et al. 2000:2). This has resulted in an agriculture that
has gone from mixture and rotation of a wide diversity of crops to only monocultures of
wheat and rice. Furthermore, the introduced rice and wheat varieties have been claimed
to be narrowly genetically based, which has caused further problems due to their
vulnerability to pests and diseases. This vulnerability in addition to other aspects of the
Green Revolution such as the large-scale monoculture that constitutes high risks for
pests has caused a need for an increased use of pesticides. As a consequence of this, it
has generated further problems since the seeds become resistant to pesticides and the
natural reduction of pest population becomes destroyed (Shiva 1991:2). ƒ

2.3.5. Soil Erosion.

According to the critics, the Green Revolution generates soil erosion due to the fact that
marginal land and forests have been cleared to make the expansion of agriculture

8
possible. This has resulted in micronutrient deficiencies of different kinds of minerals. ƒ
Water shortage. Since the new seeds need a more intensive irrigation than traditional
varieties, the critics argue that the Green Revolution has caused water shortage. To give
an example Shiva means that the high-yielding varieties of wheat are estimated to yield
over 40 percent more than traditional varieties, but they also need about three times as
much water. A consequence of this are conflicts over diminishing water resources
(Shiva 1991:4 f).

2.4. The agricultural policy today

Due to the kind of criticism of the PRSP that has been mentioned above the
international community has realized that the situation would have to change, and to
some extent it has. After the Paris declaration16 on aid effectiveness in 2005 the
ownership of the recipients of aid then became highlighted: “Partnership countries
exercise effective authority over their development policies, strategies and national
systems when relying, partially or entirely on external resources” (High-level forum
2005:3).

This means that the Mozambican government should be able to make its own decisions
about how foreign aid is going to be used, given that it is supposed to be given as
budget support and not as sector support as before. Since as much as 50 percent of the
Mozambican budget consists of foreign aid and hence, has a significant impact on the
economic development, this is an important change that has been made. The new policy
is, according to an informant at the Swedish embassy, supposed to be more democratic
as the government is given more opportunities to decide how aid should be used.
However, this new policy does not imply that the state is totally released from control of
the donor countries.

There are namely restrictions that the government has to follow; the most important
principals are to maintain the poverty reduction strategy, to uphold democracy and
human rights and also to undertake measures against corruption. Moreover, the follow-
up of these restrictions is extremely costly. For example Sweden pays around 20 million
SEK in administration costs per year for this procedure, money that is taken from the
total amount of Sweden’s aid to Mozambique. In other words, a major part of the
foreign aid is absorbed by administration costs.

9
However, the new policy together with the fact that the state has been highlighted for
agricultural development in the international discussion has, to some extent, made it
possible for the Mozambican government to undertake a more leading role for the
agricultural development. As has been highlighted earlier, according to Djurfeldt, this is
an important factor of the Green Revolution. Its new agricultural policy PROAGRI II,
that was adopted together with the country’s second PRSP; PARPA II also contains
other features which can be understood as a foundation for a Green Revolution.

One of the measures that have been undertaken within the framework of the policy was
an intensification project that was implemented in 2006. The project is still ongoing and
its main objective is to increase productivity on food crops such as rice, maize and
vegetables by providing HYV, fertilizers and pesticides to small farmers, mainly in the
area where there is a good potential for intensification, i.e. the northern parts. However
these inputs are not subsidized since it is considered that the increase in production will
be profitable enough to cover the costs for the inputs. This strategy is not in accordance
with Djurfeldt’s opinion about the role of state in the Green Revolution since he
highlights the importance of subsidized inputs in order to make them more available for
the small farmers.

Nevertheless, the reason to why the inputs are not subsidized is probably to be found in
the neo liberal values that are prevailing among the donors, which in turn makes it
difficult for the government to introduce subsidies. Nevertheless, as one of the
representatives at the Ministry of Agriculture claimed, the inputs are not the only
important factor for the development of agriculture. If the small farmers start to produce
more, on account of the inputs that are provided, there must be possibilities for them to
sell this surplus. Thus, it is also important for the government to stimulate the market.

One step that has been taken in order to realize this is the recent creation, SIMA that is
an information system directed to small farmers and tradesmen. SIMA publishes printed
data and gives information on the radio on retail, wholesale and producers’ price for 28
food products in 21 localities throughout the country. In this way, both small farmers
and merchants know the current prices of the nearby markets. The small farmers that we
talked to knew about the radio program, but the signal did not always reach them.
Despite this, they said that they usually did not have any problems to get information

10
about the prices. This can be explained by the fact that many of them were members of
an association that usually gets information about prices from the traders.

There have been other improvements that will favor the market as well. For example,
today the delay to get the permission to create a company only takes 30 days, instead of
6 months. These improvements have been made as a result of the institutionalized
instrument for dialog that now exists between the state and the private sector. One time
a year there is a meeting between the president and the private companies, every 6
months the companies meet the premiere minister and once every month the companies
meet the minister of every sector (Interview No. 39). Although, even if the legislation
has improved the access to credits has not, this makes it hard for many newly created
companies to survive since they have to find their financing themselves.

11
 3. Conclusion
Green revolution, great increase in production of food grains (especially wheat and rice)
that resulted in large part from the introduction into developing countries of new, high-
yielding varieties, beginning in the mid-20th century.

The new varieties require large amounts of chemical fertilizers and pesticides to
produce their high yields, raising concerns about cost and potentially harmful
environmental effects. Poor farmers, unable to afford the fertilizers and pesticides, have
often reaped even lower yields with these grains than with the older strains, which were
better adapted to local conditions and had some resistance to pests and diseases.

4. References
Abrahamsson, Hans & Nilsson Anders (1995) Mozambique: the Troubled Transition, Zed
Books, London and New Jersey

Altieri, Miguel A. et al. (2000-07-30) “The potential of agroecology to Combat hunger

in the devoloping world”, Agroecology in action.

12
Batley, Richard; Bjørnestad, Liv & Cumbi, Amelia (2006) Partnership General Budget
Support in Mozambique, “Joint Evaluation of General Budget Support”, Evaluation
Development Glasgow. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/49/40/36715823.pdf

Bernerson, Malin & Mortlock, Caroline (2007) Transition and tradition – a field study
on elderly livelihoods in Ribàué district Mozambique, Växjö University

Brown, E, Lester (1971) Skördar för miljoner: den gröna revolutionen och världens
livsmedelskris under sjuttiotalet, Wahlström & Widstrand, Stockholm.

Holmén, Hans (2005) “The State and Agriculture Intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa”
In:

Djurfeldt Göran (Ed.) The African Food Crisis, Lessons from the Asian Green
Revolution, CAB International, London – UK.

Howard, Julie A; Jeje, José Jaime, Tschirley David, Strasberg Paul, Crawford W Eric &
Weber, Michael T (1998) ”What makes agricultural intensification profitable for
Mozambican smallholders?”

13